Reflections On Stigma

National Public Radio has reportedly fired commentator Juan Williams for making the following remark in an interview with Stephen Colbert satirist Bill O'Reilly:

“I mean, look, Bill, I’m not a bigot. You know the kind of books I’ve written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.”

Mr. Williams also made reference to the Pakistani immigrant who pleaded guilty this month to trying to plant a car bomb in Times Square. “He said the war with Muslims, America’s war is just beginning, first drop of blood. I don’t think there’s any way to get away from these facts,” Mr. Williams said.

These are wrongheaded remarks. Contrary to what Mr. Williams implies, it is irrational to fear for one's safety upon seeing someone on a plane dressed in "Muslim garb." The vast majority of people who dress in the way he alludes to aren't terrorists, the odds of a plane carrying people in Muslim dress being hijacked is minuscule, and actual Islamist terrorists don't advertise their faith. Nor is there anything inherently scary about identifying oneself "first and foremost" as a Muslim. The equivalent sentiment among Christians is quite common.

But I don't think that Mr. Williams should be fired by NPR, or that it's good practice in general to fire people based on a single remark, however offensive. (There are exceptions. This isn't one of them.) I say this as someone who is glad that there is a strong social stigma against bigotry. There is an upside to this stigma that is under-appreciated: it signals to some people that bigotry is wrong, even if they don't quite understand why.

The downside to stigma firings is that some ignorant beliefs persist for lack of airing and being shown to be wrongheaded. The notion that "people in Muslim garb are scary" is widespread in America, and its noxious that many people believe as much. Countless people getting on planes have thought the same thing as Mr. Williams. This is exactly the sort of case where airing and logically refuting a bigoted view is better than making it so that it's an unspoken thing that many people persist in thinking privately.

On the other hand, there are vanishingly few Americans who believe, for example, that black people should still be enslaved. That logical battle was won long ago, so the stigma against a television personality being pro-slavery has very little cost: better he not air that view, because refuting it isn't really helping anyone. Another stigma with a comparatively small downside is the one against using the n-word. Were someone to use it, we could all talk about why it's inappropriate, but the only effect would be that people might use it less, something accomplished by the stigma itself.

What test can we apply to know for sure when something should be so strongly stigmatized that it justifies a firing, and when it should be less than a firing offense, so that the underlying issue can be aired? There is no perfect test. It's a judgment call. In my judgment, Juan Williams and his remarks are a case where a firing isn't the right answer. The weaker stigma of refuting his wrongheaded opinions would be both preferable and sufficient, because it is most conducive to weakening the bigoted attitude at issue.